So you offer your view on Halifax RLFC Directors but what of your own Directors then?
With Bosomworth in charge he will never have anything to do with anybody who is not connected to FC Halifax Town so how can Halifax RLFC's Board ever work with the football club with that attitude and he sits on his hands when anything comes up about the Shay leaving the rugby club to take the flack.

The Fax Board are trying to negotiate for parity with their fellow tenants who happen to be FC Halifax Town they have never had a go at FC Halifax Town its the Council who they are arguing with. The Town position may be changed when as we are told by the Fax Board the old offices are condemned so Town may have to have offices in the East Stand sometime as well. My question is why does the Council charge for a 'shop' which is only open part time (Saturdays for 2 hours and on match days) and has been fitted out and even had the security shutters fitted by Halifax RLFC to justify part of the extra rent Halifax FLFC pay more than FC Halifax Town? How much square footage do each club have in office space? How much square footage do both clubs have in other space like the shop and in Town's case the portacabins? How much does each club put back into the Council coffers for useage of the facilities such as the banqueting suite? Then we get down to how many times each club uses the pitch?
This all gets plain stupid so why not have equality and charge BOTH clubs the bl**dy same makes life so much simpler???
Town fans have done FOIs for one reason and that is to prove Halifax RLFC wrong if possible, if the boot was on the other foot they would NOT have done so.
I am sick of this anti rugby attitude as a fan of both clubs some Town fans seem to live for the day Halifax RLFC are no more, they are obsessed and plain vindictive to a club from the same town, why???

The FCHT board of directors said at the start of this whole sorry saga that they wouldn't make public comments as they would be taking legal advice over the sale. And what flack should the football club have taken? They weren't trying to buy the ground behind your club's back, and were paying the contractually agreed rent, meaning tax payers weren't being forced to make up the deficit in the council coffers.

Obviously!

Given the lack of integrity your club and directors have shown regarding rent, the attempted purchase of the Shay, etc, can you blame Town fans in trying to protect the home of their club?

[Part quote
This all gets plain stupid so why not have equality and charge BOTH clubs the bl**dy same makes life so much simpler???
Town fans have done FOIs for one reason and that is to prove Halifax RLFC wrong if possible, if the boot was on the other foot they would NOT have done so.
I am sick of this anti rugby attitude as a fan of both clubs some Town fans seem to live for the day Halifax RLFC are no more, they are obsessed and plain vindictive to a club from the same town, why???'"

Er this was a question about the RENT not Reactiv Group trying to purchase the ground, again Halifax RLFC have never bad mouthed the football club it is CMBC they have a grievance with, put the boot on the other foot and how would town fans feel about paying more???

Paying more for using more? Sounds pretty fair to me.

In that case Town should pay more they use the ground more come on how many Friendlies did Town have this season plus how many games - Conference, WRCC, FAC and FA Trophy (potential home games)???
As I said again to solve all this just charge both clubs the same end of story all will be happy, maybe not some Town fans who still think The Shay is Town's own ground and hate HxRLFC.

Did you read the article on theshay.org? Pitch usage the same. Cant compare this seasons football or rugby as neither seasons are yet completed.

I am not even sure your club are wanting to pay the same as Town any with regards rent given that Steele keeps coming out with the ridiculous line "FCHT use the pitch more than us". Accept it. You use a greater amount of the facilities and therefore, quite rightly, pay more rent.

Off to France Sunday, don't expect a post card.
Would have preferred a win last night tho,

Thanks for the clarification, but I'm more confused. What do you expect the Town BOD to say?

Both clubs signed a rental contract. One club payed it, one club (whatever the reasons) refused to. Are you expecting the club that did pay to come out with statements of support for the one that didn't? The refusal to pay inflated the costs of running the stadium, giving CMBC more of a reason to sell it, putting the home of the football club in jeopardy - why would they support that stance?

A PM of "glad you're not here" will do!

I'll be rooting for you on Sunday.

Surely a fixed cost per game per stand open should be applied to a council owned facility for its joint tenants, make the tariff public and crack on guys.

This argument falls flat when you start analysing how much each club costs CMBC to run the stadium such as because Town play football the grass has to be cut much shorter so consequently more regular and stewarding for football is tighter due to the threat of trouble etc.. Why is it ridiculous to say Town use the pitch more so should pay more???
Again to stop all this nonsense charge both the bl**dy same, I also ask again would Town fans be happy if this situation was the other way around???
I think not, in fact I know not!